Follow us on social

google cta
Shutterstock_1547708672-scaled

Weapons biz celebrates declining 'state of humankind,' cold war with China

Defense industry CEOs recently assured investors that the world is still unstable enough to keep the money flowing.

Reporting | Military Industrial Complex
google cta
google cta

Business is good for weapons companies according to their just released first-quarter-2021 earnings. Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and General Dynamics all had first-quarter-revenues that exceeded estimates. And executives from all three corporations were surprisingly blunt with investors on earnings calls about why their revenues were soaring: the Biden administration’s tilt toward great power competition with China and greater international instability.

General Dynamics’ Chairman and CEO Phebe Novakovic clearly stated that what’s bad for people is good for their bottomline. “[U]nfortunately, for the state of humankind, the world has become an increasingly dangerous place,” said Novakovic on Wednesday. “And so we see the reflection of that concern in many U.S. allies with increased demand for many of our products in Europe, Eastern Europe, a little bit in Asia, parts of the Middle East and in the former Commonwealth nations and the U.K.”

She later concluded that the potential of the world becoming more dangerous was producing a “nice cadence continuing in terms of our orders.”

Meanwhile, Lockheed CEO James Taiclet — who in January told investors that a growing security rivalry with China should give his company leeway with antitrust regulators concerned about Lockheed’s vertical consolidation of the missile industry — doubled down on his emphasis that a brewing cold war with China would be good for Lockheed’s business.

“[T]he Biden administration clearly recognizes that we're all in the year of this resurgent great power competition and regional disruptive powers that are out there as well like Iran and North Korea,” said Taiclet on April 20. “That's a world that's not going to get any more peaceful anytime soon, most likely and so strong national defense is a priority of the administration, I believe, based on their own statements.”

Taiclet went on to conclude that “I see strong opportunities going forward under this administration for international defense cooperation, that would benefit Lockheed Martin, I expect.”

Northrop Grumman CEO Kathy Warden echoed similar sentiments, telling investors on Thursday that “we believe our capabilities will remain well aligned with U.S. national security priorities,” emphasizing that “the Biden administration has signaled that it views competition with China as the most pressing long-term security challenge and will invest in the capabilities needed to maintain U.S. national security advantages.”

She singled out the government’s “modernizing” of the nuclear arsenal as “aligned with our portfolio.” The investment in nuclear weapons is a $2 trillion project, one that Quincy Institute Distinguished Fellow Joe Cirincione observed was “a collection of legacy systems and new programs promoted for financial and political profit,” benefiting lobbyists and defense contractors like Northrop, not driven by U.S. national security interests or strategy.

Indeed, none of the comments coming from weapons manufacturers celebrating the potential for a cold war competition with China or the declining “state of humankind” shouldn’t come as any surprise. They are, after all, in the business of selling tools of war. But it’s taxpayers who are picking up a growing bill for weapons, and those bills are coming from an increasingly less competitive and shrinking industry.

A 2019 report from the Government Accountability Office found that nearly half of all Defense Department contracts went to United Technologies, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, General Dynamics, and Boeing. And, according to Brown University’s Cost of War Project, over half of the defense budget — currently at $740 billion per year — goes to private contractors.

That might explain why Novakovic’s statements to investors on Wednesday could lament the “state of humankind” and “the world has become an increasingly dangerous place” but lead with the observation that “it’s a very good start to the year.”

With a president in the White House who explicitly linked his ambitious domestic spending bill to competing with China, an ongoing (if unnecessary) nuclear weapons overhaul, and a Pentagon budget that may actually grow by $11 billion if Biden’s proposed budget is adopted, it’s certainly a “good start to the year” for an industry that profits off the world becoming more dangerous. 


Image: Pla2na via shutterstock.com
google cta
Reporting | Military Industrial Complex
Mbs-mbz-scaled
UAE President Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed al-Nahyan receives Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman at the Presidential Airport in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates November 27, 2019. WAM/Handout via REUTERS

Is the US goading Arab states to join war against Iran?

QiOSK

On Sunday, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Mike Waltz told ABC News that Arab Gulf states may soon step up their involvement in the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran. “I expect that you'll see additional diplomatic and possibly military action from them in the coming days and weeks,” Waltz said.

Then, on Monday morning, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) slammed Saudi Arabia for staying out of the war even as “Americans are dying and the U.S. is spending billions” of dollars to conduct regime change in Iran. “If you are not willing to use your military now, when are you willing to use it?” Graham asked. “Hopefully this changes soon. If not, consequences will follow.”

keep readingShow less
Why Tehran may have time on its side
Top image credit: Iranian army military personnel stand at attention under a banner featuring an image of an Iranian-made unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) during a military parade commemorating the anniversary of Army Day outside the Shrine of Iran's late leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in the south of Tehran, Iran, on April 18, 2025. (Photo by Morteza Nikoubazl/NurPhoto)

Why Tehran may have time on its side

QiOSK

A provocative calculus by Anusar Farrouqui (“policytensor”) has been circulating on X and in more exhaustive form on the author’s Substack. It purports to demonstrate a sobering reality: in a high-intensity U.S.-Iran conflict, the United States may be unable to suppress Iranian drone production quickly enough to prevent a strategically consequential period of regional devastation.

The argument is framed through a quantitative lens, carrying the seductive appeal of mathematical precision. It arranges variables—such as U.S. sortie rates and degradation efficiency against Iranian repair cycles and rebuild speeds—to suggest a "sustainable firing rate." The implication is that Iran could maintain a persistent strike capability long enough to exhaust American political patience, forcing Washington toward a premature declaration of success or an unfavorable ceasefire.

keep readingShow less
Will Democrats pop Trump's $50 billion trial balloon for war?
Top image credit: Sens. Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) and Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) sit look on during a congressional hearing in January, 2025. (Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call/Sipa USA)

Will Democrats pop Trump's $50 billion trial balloon for war?

Washington Politics

On Wednesday, Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) told CNN that he would support new funding for the U.S. war with Iran — but only if Israel and Arab Gulf states help pay for it.

“We’re using our taxpayer money to protect those countries,” Gallego said. “We’re using our men to protect these countries. They need to throw in and have skin in the game too.”

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.